Atgxtg

Great. Welcome. Enter freely and of your own will. Travel swiftly, and leave something of the happiness you bring. We are all pleasedto have some new blood here and hope it is a sign of things to come. So you had no prior experience or exposure to RQ? That's encouraging.

Yup. Nope. Check pp. 58-59 of the Player's Book. Oh, and to clarify things, It's not the absence of the Disarm tactic that I mind, per say. It's the priories and choices made about what is in RQG vs. what isn't. I think even Jeff has problem had more request for a disarm move than for a picture of a dead pig. At least I hope so. I hate to think his group is that much weirder than mine.

Oh, I know, but it seems artificial. Especially since STR is mostly about muscle mass ans that's mostly a factor of size. But I leave it you guys to work it out. I got to stay away from this section before I get tarred and feathered.

Three pages plus some of the pages spent on art or other things would. No I didn't accuse. I was just foolish enough to actually type out what virtually every old RQer who isn't buying this on impulse is going to do. Ask themselves why do they want this when they already have a bunch of RQ/HQ stuff already> I have X money to spend,and X times a million things I'd like to buy, and that not just RPGs. So I have to choose to buy some things and not buy others. So when I'm not buying on impulse, and especially when buying blind. I didn't accuse them of anything. I just asked questions and explained my reaction to the approach taken when it caught Jeff by surprise. Now from my perspective, I'm looking to start op a new campaign in the future after not having the chance to game in five years (I was working 3rd shift). So I was wondering what RPG to run and if I wanted to run RQG, and if I looked like my players would enjoy it. I've got lots of good RPGs I'd love to run and play, but not enough free time or players to run them all. With all due respect this is pretty much the same thing I've heard when Hero Wars, MRQ, HeroQuest, MRQ2, HQ2 etc. has come out. All of those game have their own following. but none led to the influx of new blood and the restoration of RQ as a leading FRPG in the gaming market. Wasn't the BRPG BGB supposed to bring in new players? Did it? Sure. A lot? Uh, no. And speaking on RQG again, who posting here was drawn into our corner by RQG. It's the BGB all over again. We're the choir, and that corner is our home turf. Hopefully nowhere. It was a free fan produced product. As for Traits/Passion, they are a mixed blessing, and honestly I don't see them being the deciding factor in how well RQ fits Glorantha. For DECADES Greg Stafford's been saying that RQ wan't really a good fit for Glorantha, as RQ was gritty realistic while Glortantha was mythic and larger than life. That's supposedly why we got HeroQuest. It was a better fit. Traits/Passions don't change that, nor does any of the stuff that I posted about. What in RQG does? Well,, it was one bit, and it did give a pretty interesting game-using Pendragon not RQ. As for being an RQ grognard, I'm produ of that. If it wasn't for all the RQ2 and RQ3 gronard, do you think RQ would exist in any form other that 30 year old backstock? It wasn't the D&Ders who kept RQ alive at the gaming tables. It wasn't the CoCers or the "didn't really exist until the BGB" BRPers. It was the RQ grognards and the Strombringer adherents. How many game sessions does you group spend looking at the art? Even one? In my experience, at best, the GM would show a particular picture for effect, and that was usually a map, or drawing on a location, NPC, monster, or some sort of puzzle.In my 38 years of experience I've never seen a gaming group spend ten minutes, let alone, an entire session looking at the art. Yes, of course. My statement was to explain my reaction to there not being a disarm rule in the core RQG book and to question if I should buy RQG or would want to run it with my players. Strictly me. I never said that RQG was bad or that anyone else shouldn't enjoy it or no play it. Me, I'd much rather have the combat rules complete in one book, so I can find them when I need to, than have to flip through multiple books hunting something down ("Wasn't it on the page opposite the dead pig?"). Or carrying all those books to someone else's house to game. Or am I the only one for whom outfitting for the weekly game session is like prepping for an expedition? Am I the only one whose has overstuffed a backpack to bursting with Players Book, GM Book, Bestiary, Campaign setting, special sub-book for character A, special sub-book for character B, etc. etc.? Am I the only one who has, in that huge assortment of book, forgotten to bring the adventure? Am I the only one who rather have one book, with less style and more substance than a lot of pretty paperweights that I'm going to have to drag will me each week? Thee was a time we people could question RPGs and RPG companies. This site was founded by someone who got banned (repeatedly) from the Mongose RQ forums for doing just that. But I guess that's not the case here anymore. The sad thing is that is isn't just a case of "Let's all drink the cool-aid", but that people are more than happy to mix their own. Blindly defending everything Chaosium does without question isn't good for RQ. As far as my "nitpicking" goes. I was hoping to get some stuff fixed while the game is still in PDF before it ends up in the printed version. I though now would be a good time to address and fix bugs before it's too late. Now, I'm more that willing to keep out of the RQG section. So if everybody is willing to let thing lie, so am I. If someone wants to call me out over something, that's fine too. And I never said anyone had to agree with my opinion about anything, did I?

Not every, but most things. But I just don't see the rational for the latter. Just because something is bigger it shouldn't be weaker, should it? But anyway, I asked, got answered, expressed my concerns, and can move on.

How common is Heal Wound in RQG.?Not every group had in in RQ2 or RQ3. I was thinking of providing enough time to get to the body and cast a high powered Heal.

Thanks guys for the replies. They told me what I wanted to know. Not quite the longform of Cults of Prax, but better than RQ3's GoG.

Sorry Jason, I could have sworn that you said WoW was your "go to" version of BRP. I got that completely wrong. Sorry.

Me too. To be honest we just ran with 0 HP is dead. That is until RQ 3 came out and gave something like 10 MR, depending on where you looked. I do think Narl has a point. RQ combat is especially deadly, and probably should be a little more forgiving. In real life instant kills are pretty rare, and multiple injuries don't really add together to kill you quite the way they do in RQ. I mean someone who's had a leg severed isn't going to die if they take a 1 point arm hit. Yeah the guy might bleed out a little quicker, but most fatalities take a little time to kill ya. So I could see doing something to make things a little easier.What I could see is the time being dependent upon how badly damaged the soon to be deceased is. Maybe subtract 1 round per point of "excess" damage? Or maybe a Spirit Magic Spell that could restore the recently deceased to their body.

Okay how about the soul sticks around for one round per point of POW? No loss, just a time limit.

Ah. Good point, epseically if they have the SR12 called shot rule. Yeah, either they need a way to heal you in the one round you got, or something. I could see something like it takes time for the soul to leave the body and the victim loses 1 magic point per round. When they are out, then they are dead. Maybe massive damage has you lose MPS quicker? Just a thought.

This is what I was afraid of. RQ3 fixed quite a few bugs that they discovered in RQ2. By going back to RQ2 the bugs are back. I was hoping that bringing this up here and now would let them fix it in the PDF. I don't think they need different tables, just put a reasonable cap on the secondary stats. I don't mind magical enhancements so much either, since they are temporary and limited. An extra 10% or so isn't going to break things. An extra 75% will. Even on the small scale it will make animals much nastier, since their base combat scores will go up. A STR 50 critter, like an elephant or allosaurus is going to get something like +45% to base combat scores just from STR, that brings a 25% attack up to 70%, and a 40% attack up to 85%.

I was thinking of capturing prisoners for ransom.

Okay, earlier editions of CoC say that Pilot (Aircraft) needs to be broken down into specializations, but Pilot (Boat) does not. The rules do say that each general type of aircraft is a separate skill specialty, but leave it up to the Keeper as to how to handle it, so I'd say its up to you, and if you want to sub-divide boat into a few skills go right ahead. Personally, I'd probably treat each pilot skill as a separate skill, but use the old related skill rule they had for similar weapons. That is you could use half your skill in a similar vehicle. The idea being that a master fighter pilot at 90% can probably fly and land an airliner a lot better than someone with no flying experience whatsoever. In CoC7 I'd just treat it as a difficult task. I know in all those old movies they always ask for someone with flying experience, not someone with experience in Pilot (Airliner).

Yeah, and using smaller dice means a bigger constant plus. (STR+SIZ)/16 works for creatures, but leaves you little variation between PCs, unless you vary die size. Some other options: You could use an increasing formula, something like a square root to keep the bigger critters in check. If you use something like square root (STR+SIZ)/2 you get an average character doing 2D6, but keep a bear down to 4D6, and a dragon down to 6D6. You could use the /10 damage but treat db as a multiplier. So a normal person would do x1 damage, but a bear x4, and a dragon x14. Then just say than a roll on 1 on the damage die does 1 point, no modifiers. Note that with this method you could keep the weapon damage die if you wanted to, or just say everone does 1D6 (or 2D6 or 1D12) or some such. It gives you more wiggle room. Much like how changing the human SIZ range from 3-18 to 8-18 opened up room for smaller than mansized creatures (SIZ 1-7 instead of 1-2). Your problem here is that multiple dice lead to low minimums and a stronger bell curve. Someone might roll 6 points on 6D6 but anything under a dozen is very very unlikely. That's why I think 1D20 is better for your purposes than 3D6. Same average, but a grazing hit is far more likely.

That's my view. RQ3 solved that nicely by capping the secondary mods at +10%. So the huge STR 75 creature only gets +10% to it's combat skills from STR. Now primary mods (INT and DEX for attack/combat skills) were not capped. So a creature with a 75 DEX or INT would have gotten +65% in all combat skills, but that doesn't bother me so much. mostly because there weren't any creatures in RQ with a 75 DEX or INT. I think Steve Perrin figured that out after seeing the dinosaur stats in Gateway Bestiary, and that's why we got the secondary caps in RQ3. Now I was thinking that since they are using fan feedback for corrections in RQG that putting the +10% or even a +15% cap limit to secondary mods would be a possibility if the issue were raise and the reasons explained. I didn't expect it to backfire and upset people. At this point I'm afraid to ask about the SIZ table.

No, because it not 11 SR later, it's on SR 12. The count doesn't start on the SR you change your mind. For example, lets say someone got hit and dropped down to -2 HP on SR 6 by a spear. You were going to do something on SR 7, but change your statement. So you'd act on you DEX SR plus 5 for the change, plus whatever the point value of the spell. If you had DEX SR 3, you could do a Heal 3 on SR 11 (3+5+3) and bring your friend back to positive hit points. BTW this also means that if caught off guard you might have time to get a quick spell off or fire a missile weapon before being attacked in melee.

So I have to buy something in the first week that it's out? Does that apply to just me or should we pull all PDFs for sale after seven days? C'mon. And I wasn't nitpicking. I was inquiring about what was in the book, and what wasn't, and then explaining my reactions. But okay, I'll go back to my previous versions, and stay clear of RQG.

I misintpreted Rick Meints message. I want to apologize to him and make it clear that my previous statement was in error. I'm going to edit it out now. Except someone else beat me to it.

I doubt that it will. While RQ2 was novel and trend setting in 1978, the rules as passe today and lack a lot of thing people take for granted today such as disarm rules, non lethal combat). New players won't be impressed with a 40 year old game system. New players will want something that can play out of the box without having to buy a Gms book and bestiary. Yeah, WotC can get away with that in D&D, but they are reselling a current game, relying on the old players to make the switch and bring the new players along. You don't have that sort of situation or fanbase with RQ.

Maybe in the UK. It was something like $8 in the US. I think the boxed set went for $12, and I don't recall what the hardcover went for, although the new RQ2 hardcover sells for $19.95. Now ten times $8 is $80 and if the GM's book and bestiary sell for $27.95 each that's $83.85 which is in the ten time ball park for the core rules. And that's assuming the RQG hardcopy costs the same as the PDF. Will it? Again UK pricing is different. People over there spent a lot more on some RPGs than we did in the US. But even in the early 80s RQ3 was noted for being overpriced, with the blame place sqaurely on Avalon Hill, who still priced things for the wargamming market. But considering page count and content, RQ3 had a lot in in that RQG lacks. Oh, and if it's about times and inflation and buying power, how come they can sell a hardcopy of RQ2 for under $20 today? And if RQG is basically RQ2 with some new bits added, why couldn't they have just resold RQ2 stuff and put the new bits into new supplements?

Let me try to explain my reaction. In RQ2 cramming lots of additional stuff in the appendix in 4 point font for what was already a fairly complete (cults being the one big omission) 144 page book is something I consider as a perk or freebie. Spending 3 pages of that in a 446 page rulebook that lacks even a token bestiary or the complete rules for combat I consider to be a waste. Basically something more important should have taken up that space. It looks to me like Chaoiusm is taking an RPG that it's already sold to us several times, breaking it up into multiple books, and adding a bunch of fluff to get people to pay ten times what they paid when they bought it the first time around. What's in RQG that's not in other Chosium products to make us want to buy it? Incorporating Passions from Pendragon doesn't wow me-Pendragon Pass came out decades ago. Reworking the old Trait system from Pendragon/Thieves World into the Rune % doesn't wow me either. Greg could have drawn on Pendragon for Glorantha back in the 80s. What's in that 446 page book that hasn't been in a Chaosium product before that will make people want to play RQG? I'm not saying that there isn't something there, but nothing posted here in the past on in any of the reviews has won me over yet. In fact, quite the opposite. It looks like I either have to wait and shell out for at least two more books to play this game-or I could just use the RQ2 books I already have, which should be close enough. But, if my RQ2 books are close enough, why should I buy the new books? Now again, I'm not saying that people shouldn't buy the new game, but I am wondering why? Three pages on Gloranthan languages don't win me over. Especially if they are 3 pages that I already bought 30+ years ago when I bought RQ2. Sorry to rant, and I don't mean to knock the game, I don't know enough about it yet to really judge if fairly, but why should someone who already has RQ2, RQ3 and the supplements buy RQG? Not for three pages on languages. Nor for 100 pages of art (We don't game art).

Say in RQG about how many cults are there in the book, and do we get long form or short form write ups?

There used to be a rule in RQ2 and RQ3 where you could change your action in the round. You took a 5SR (RQ2) or 3SR (RQ3) penalty, but this usually gave you more than enough time to switch to a heal. In RQ2, with DEX SR 3 and a 5 SR penalty, you can get a Heal 4 off on SR 12.

Yeah, that's my take on it. Three pages to explain languages that nobody, except perhaps Greg Stafford, knows the words to or will ever actually speak. I think I'm slipping off the fence.